Agenda of Community Services Committee

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Community Services Committee Meeting - Public Excluded - 22 May 2015	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(j) To prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage. · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).
2	Status Report - Community Services Committee - 2 July 2015	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Minutes of a meeting of the Community Services Committee

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Friday 22 May 2015, commencing at 9.01am

Present: Councillor P Rainey (Chairperson), Councillors R Copeland, M Lawrey, P Matheson, G Noonan (Deputy Chairperson), T Skinner and M Ward

In Attendance: Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Manager Administration (P Langley), Administration Advisers (G Brown and J Young), and Youth Councillors Emily Thomas and Daniel Leaper

Apology: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese for attendance, and Councillor Noonan for early departure

1. Apologies

Resolved CS/2015/001

THAT apologies be received and accepted from Her Worship the Mayor for attendance and Councillor Noonan for early departure.

Rainey / Copeland Carried

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson advised that since the distribution of the agenda, Elizabeth Dooley would not be speaking at public forum.

There was no other change to the order of business.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register and no conflicts with items on the agenda were declared.

4. Public Forum

There was no public forum.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 26 February 2015

Document number M1217, agenda pages 7 - 13 refer.

Resolved CS/2015/002

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Community Services Committee, held on 26 February 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Ward / Lawrey Carried

Attendance: Councillor Skinner arrived at 9.03am.

6. Status Report - Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015

Document number R4285, agenda pages 14 - 15 refer.

In response to a question, Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward advised that consultants had been appointed to conduct the external review of the three campgrounds, and the final report would be received in July.

In response to a question, Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, said the Arts and Heritage Adviser, Debbie Daniell-Smith was dealing with progressing the interpretation panel for the Maitai Walkway.

Resolved CS/2015/003

THAT the Status Report Community Services Committee 22 May 2015 (R4285) and its attachment (A1157454) be received.

Rainey / Noonan Carried

Arts, Festivals and Events

7. Arts Fund - Approval of Concepts

Document number R4133, agenda pages 16 - 22 refer.

Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, presented the report.

There was a discussion regarding not being able to visually review the artworks which made it difficult to approve or decline the six concepts. It was highlighted that it was the Committee’s responsibility to consider the nature of the works and not their artistic merit.

In response to a question, Ms Hermsen said the funding for these artworks had already been approved as part of the 2014/15 budgets and due to a tight timeframe these needed to be approved or declined.

There was a concern raised about the process for artworks and it was suggested that other funding providers should be considered as well as working in partnership with other organisations.

Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, advised that projects would be allocated some funding through the Arts Panel. He added that officers would not be taking a proactive approach to engage with other funders and that officers would be working with Arts Council Nelson for opportunities in relation to artworks.

In response to a question, Ms Hermsen indicated that the majority of the artists were local and that Council’s Arts Selection Panel consisted of Andrew Petheram, Nic Foster, Caroline Marshall and Julie Catchpole.

There was a concern raised about costs and instalment, and it was suggested that for kinetic artworks, noise and glare needed to be considered.

In response to a question, Ms Hermsen confirmed the artworks still had to be consulted on and would go through the normal resource consent process.

It was discussed that the Arts Panel had the necessary expertise to progress with the proposed projects as they saw fit.

Resolved CS/2015/004

THAT the report Arts Fund - Approval of Concepts (R4133) and its attachments (A1338048) be received;

AND THAT the following concepts for possible artwork are approved;

· Hinake

· Rock Hoppers

· Rocks in the Sky

· Sails

· Stack

· Welcome Cloak

AND THAT the approved concepts are further considered by Council’s Arts Selection Panel for commissioning from the Arts Fund.

Ward / Copeland Carried

Community Development

8. Council CCTV Provision

Document number R4130, agenda pages 23 - 25 refer.

Manager Community Partnerships, Shanine Hermsen, presented the report.

There was a discussion in relation to having mobile Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras which could be placed at a number of locations and not restricted to only Victory Square.

Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, advised that the rationale behind installing cameras was that they were connected directly to the Police Station. He added that if the cameras were mobile technical issues would likely incur.

In response to a question, Ms Hermsen advised the $3,500 related to the annual lease and maintenance costs for the cameras.

It was noted that in section 1.1 of the Officer’s report the date was incorrect and should be 2014 instead of 2015.

Resolved CS/2015/005

THAT the report Council CCTV Provision (R4130) be received;

AND THAT the Committee endorse the provision of $3,500 in each of 2016/17 and 2017/18 for the ongoing operational costs of the CCTV cameras installed at Victory Square;

AND THAT any subsequent requests for CCTV cameras are considered on a case by case basis and should meet the criteria as set out in this report (R4130).

Noonan / Matheson Carried

9. Nelson Youth Council Update

Youth Councillors Daniel Leaper and Emily Thomas provided an update on Youth Council activities.

Mr Leaper advised that three youth councillors had resigned half way through the year and three new youth councillors had joined.

Mr Leaper said the youth councillors spoke at the Urban Environments Bylaw hearings and advised that youth councillors were interested in some of the topics raised including busking, alcohol ban and the keeping of animals.

He provided a summary of the topics discussed at the recent Youth Council meeting which covered the Tahunanui Postcard project and sugary drinks.

Emily Thomas spoke about the footpaths at Saxton field, the proposed gondola and Rockquest.

Ms Thomas added that youth councillors were speaking with Viv Rounce from the Elma Turner Library in relation to setting up a study area in the activities room. She also said Youth Week was approaching.

It was suggested that the Youth Council consider ways to celebrate the 175^th anniversary of Nelson in 2017.

REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES

10. Nelson Youth Council - 1 April 2015

Document number R4281 refer, agenda pages 26 - 30 refer

Resolved CS/2015/006

THAT the confirmed minutes of a meeting of the Nelson Youth Council, held on 1 April 2015, be received.

Noonan / Lawrey Carried

11. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved CS/2015/007

THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

Rainey / Ward Carried

Item	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interests protected (where applicable)
1	Community Services – Public Excluded Minutes – 26 February 2015 These minutes contain information regarding: Terms of a community lease	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
2	Status Report - Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015 The status report contains information regarding: Property Purchase Stoke Community and Sports Facility	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
3	Community Leases - Omnibus Report This report contains information regarding: Community Leases	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Community Services – Public Excluded Minutes – 26 February 2015

These minutes contain information regarding:

Terms of a community lease

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Status Report - Community Services Committee - 22 May 2015

The status report contains information regarding:

Property Purchase

Stoke Community and Sports Facility

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Community Leases - Omnibus Report

This report contains information regarding:

Community Leases

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

The meeting went into public excluded session at 9.50am and resumed in public session at 10.04am.

12. Re-admittance of the Public

Resolved CS/2015/008

THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting.

Rainey / Noonan Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.04am.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Attachment 1 : Community facilities FEES AND CHARGES 2015/16

Section 1: Concessions Tahunanui Sport field and Esplanade/Landscape

Revenue and Financing Policy : 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current Recovery: 93% General rates 7%User charges

Governed by Tahunanui Reserves Management Plan and Parks and Reserves Management Plan this allows for:

· 6 sites within inland Management area i.e. sport field and beach area Lions playground

· 3 sites allowed around the sites in the activity area i.e. Bumperboats, skate rink area.

· 3 sites allowed Coastal Management area i.e. back beach. Estuary area.

It is proposed an increase of CPI (0.8%) is applied to closer align recoveries with Finance and Revenue Policy

	2014-2015	2015-2016
Commercial Concessions with and without power supply	$200 + GST per month or 10% of gross, whichever is greater ($50 per month for power + GST) Minimum payments for 4 months	201.50 +GST per month or 10% of gross, whichever is greater ($50.50 per month for power + GST) Minimum payments for 4 months
Commercial Races/Events	$2 per competitor for < 300 $3 per competitor for 300 - 400 $5 per competitor for > 400 Entry level activity promotion events excluded from charges	No Change due to very small increase
Circus and other similar events that need to stay on site overnight	$200 + GST per day (plus power where used)	201.50 + GST per day
Reserve Booking incl. Workshops with and without power supply	$40 per booking (incl. GST) $0 for community events/community benefit	$40.50

Section 2: Sport fields:

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 93% General rates 7%User charges

It is proposed an increase of CPI (0.8%) is applied to closer align recoveries with Finance and Revenue Policy

	2014-2015	2015-2016	Reasons/Objective
Sports field Allocation	Seasonal Allocation for weekend games: 10% of actual additional maintenance costs over above park standard	No Change	Good alignment with Revenue and Financing Policy
One off Sports field Bookings (non gate charge)	Daily rate for sports fields $200 Trafalgar Park/Saxton Oval $400 plus GST	Daily rate for sports fields $201.50 Plus GST Trafalgar Park/Saxton Oval $403 plus GST	CPI of 0.08%
Practice Fields	No charge	No Change	Clubs encouraged to use practice fields to keep competition grounds in good condition

Miscellaneous charges

	2014-2015	2015-2016	Reasons/Objective
Other Charge Grounds	$900 per event day or 2.5% of gross gate take whichever is the greater	$908 per event day or 2.5% of gross gate take whichever is the greater	Rarely used by community organisations
Use of Council Resource consent for amplified sound that will exceed 55dB and/or run until after 10pm. (RM125012)		$500 plus GST for events of a commercial nature (ie ticketed) including use of Site Noise management Plan No Council charge for Event Noise Management Plan except for costs to prepare No charge for free community events using Council’s consent.	As agreed by Audit Risk and Finance committee 2015
Beehives on Council land	$5.00 per hive	$7.50 per hive	1 operator with 322 hives (current) – low administration cost. Increase is within operator expectations
Hunting Permits	Nil	Nil	Benefit to Reserve Areas
Camping at Haulashore and Oyster Islands	Nil	Nil	Up to 2 nights only. Used by Scouts etc .
Key Deposit	Nil	Varying scale depending on significance of key. From $20 to $200	Large administration overhead to administer key management. Review of entire key system underway
Grazing Licences	Extensive areas Market Valuation Other areas by negotiation	No Change	Status Quo. Council pays for some grazing i.e Grampians. The animals graze the vegetation therefore reducing the fire risk, which is a more cost effective than contractor maintaining vegetation.

Section 3: Hanging Baskets

2014-2015

2015-2026

Reasons

Hanging Baskets

$40 ( + GST) in CBD & perimeter and high profile arrival roads

Outside CBD – $120 or negotiate directly with Nelmac

No Change

Recoveries cover actual costs.

Section 4: Swimming Pools (Riverside and Nayland )

Revenue and Financing Policy: 100% General rates

Recoveries: Nil Management Contractor (CLM) retains all user charges

Contract managed by Community Leisure Management (CLM) to provide.

· Maintenance and promotion of the pools

· Provide learn to swim, casual swim club access and fitness programmes

· Council sets all fees and charges (Not CLM)

· CLM have identified an increase of 8% operational costs over last two years

Hire	2014 - 2015 (inc GST)	2015 -2016 (inc GST)	Comment
Adult Admission	$4.80	$5	Increase fees to meet with an increase in maintenance costs 3% increase for adults 10% for child 5% for seniors etc
Child Admission	$3	$3.30
*Seniors, Students & Community Service Card-Holders	$4	$4.20
Pre-School Admission	$2	No Change	Mid range for similar pools in other provincial centres
School Pupil Admission	$2	No Change	Mid range for similar pools in other provincial centres
Pool Hire During Public Swimming Times - Riverside	$475	No Change	Higher end cost for pools compared to other provincial centres
Pool Hire During Public Swimming Times - Nayland Complex	$475	No Change	Higher end cost for pools compared to other provincial centres
Regular Hire - Riverside	$55	No Change	No increase this year
Regular Hire - Nayland Complex	$55	No Change	No increase this year
Casual Hire Outside Public Swimming Times - Riverside	$300	No Change	Mid range cost for similar pools compared to other provincial centres
Casual Hire Outside Public Swimming Times- Nayland Complex	$280	No Change	Mid range cost for similar pool compared to other provincial centres
Lane Hire	$32	No Change	Higher end cost for pools compared to other provincial centres

Section 5: Superloo

Revenue and Financing Policy: 100% General rates

Recoveries : Nil (Management Contractor (OCS) retains all user charges)

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan allows for;

· User fees to be set by Council

· Costs kept to a minimum to encourage use

Hire	2014 -15	2015 -16
Superloo admittance	$0.20	No Change
Shower	$2	Good alignment
Locker	$1	with Revenue and
Towel	$2	Financing Policy
Laundry - Cold Wash	$3
Laundry - Warm wash	$4
Drier	$4

Section 6: Halls and Stadiums;

6.1 Saxton Stadium

Revenue and Financing Policy: (In absence of funding policy specific to this venue) 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 82% General Rates 18%User charges

Pavilion Hire	2014 – 15	2015 -16
Full Pavilion (all day)	$650	$655
Pavilion (Evening)	$325	$338
Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$285	$287
Half Pavilion (Full Day)	$430	$433
Half Pavilion(Evening)	$215	$217
Half Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$165	$166
Full Pavilion Per Hour	$33	$33.50
Half Pavilion Per Hour	$19	$19
Saxton Pavilion (all day)	$ 270	$272
Pavilion (Evening)	$215	$216
Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$135	$136
Half Pavilion (Full Day)	$135	$136
Half Pavilion(Evening)	$98	$99
Half Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$78	$79
Full Pavilion Per Hour	$24	No change
Half Pavilion Per Hour	$18	No change
Full Pavilion (all day)	$800	$806
Pavilion (Evening)	$525	$530
Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$525	$530
Half Pavilion (Full Day)	$425	$428
Half Pavilion(Evening)	$315	$317.50
Half Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)	$315	$317.50

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan allows for management contract for Saxton Stadium, including bookings, invoicing use of the stadium and maintenance

· All revenue recovered by Council

· Recover 37% maintenance cost form TDC

Stadium Hire	2014 – 15	2015-2016
Whole Building and Pavilion	$3600	$3630
Stadium (Full Day)	$3000	$3025
Stadium half day or half stadium full day	$2550	$2570
Half Stadium half day	$1750	$1765
Whole Building and Pavilion	$1250	$1260
Stadium (Full Day)	$2350	$2370
Stadium half day or half stadium full day	$1600	$1615
Half Stadium half day	$1150	$1160
Basketball Court (per hour)	$38	No Change
*Netball Court (per hour)	$38	No Change
*Volleyball Court (per hour)	$20	No Change
*Badminton Court (per hour)	$15	No Change
Shower	$ 2	No Change

Note* increased use due to the closure of the Trafalgar Centre

It is proposed an increase of CPI (0.8%) is applied to closer align recv recoveries with Revenue and Financing Policy.

6.2 Saxton Oval Pavilion

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current Recovery: 96.5% General rate 3.5% User charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan allows

· Management contract for Saxton Stadium. Including bookings, invoicing use of the stadium and maintenance

· Large sporting events e.g. CWC 2015

· All revenue recovered by Council

· Recover 37% maintenance cost from TDC

Oval Hire

2014-2015

2015-2016

The building has a high commercial use and it is proposed to increase commercial fees by 3% for greater alignment with the Finance and Revenue Policy.

Only an increase of CPI of 0.8% has been proposed for non-commercial/cultural or Community hire.

Private Social Functions (eg Weddings & Birthdays)

All Day (Weddings)

$700

$720

Full Pavilion (all day)

$350

$360

Pavilion (Evening)

$235

$242

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$225

$232

Meeting-Non Commercial/Cultural and Community Events

Saxton Pavilion (all day)

$135

$136

Pavilion (Evening)

$90

$91

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$85

$86

Commercial Use (Seminars or Expos)

Full Pavilion (all day)

$525

$540

Pavilion (Evening)

$365

$375

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$ 320

$330

6.3 Stoke Hall

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 85.5% General rates: 14.5%User charges

No changes are proposed to 2014-15 fees and charges for the Stoke Hall as there is currently good alignment with the Finance and Revenue Policy

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan which allows management by contractor (Spotless) responsible for bookings, cleaning and maintenance

Hire	2015-2016 prices
Ticket Performance Events/Shows (includes GST)
Whole Building (Full Day)	$380
Whole Building (Evening)	$245
Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)	$125
Private Social Functions (includes GST)
Whole Building (Full Day)	$250
Whole Building (Evening)	$205
Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)	$110
Non Commercial/Cultural and Community Events (Includes GST)
Whole Building (Full Day)	$193
Whole Building (Evening)	$122
Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)	$ 77
Main Hall (Full Day)	$152
Main Hall (Evening)	$102
Main Hall (Morning/Afternoon)	$77
Supper Room (Full Day)	$77
Supper Room (Evening)	$60
Supper Room (Morning/Afternoon)	$40
Supper Room per hour	$17.50
Meeting Room (Full Day)	$55
Meeting Room (Evening)	$40
Meeting Room (Morning/Afternoon)	$28
Meeting Room per hour	$13
Stoke Hall (cont) Sport Activities & Practice (Includes GST)	2015-16 prices
Whole Building (Full Day)	$195
Whole Building (Evening)	$138
Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)	$85
Main Hall (Full Day)	$152
Main Hall (Evening)	$112
Main Hall (Morning/Afternoon)	$75
Hourly rate (Evening)	$21
Hourly rate (Morning/Afternoon)	$17
Whole Building (Per Day)	$750
Whole Building (Per Day)	$550
Whole Building (Evening)	$350
Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)	$350

6.4 Wakapuaka Hall

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 95%General rates 5%User charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan which allows management by contractor (Spotless) responsible for bookings, cleaning and maintenance

No changes are proposed to 2014-15 fees to encourage greater use of this facility

Hire

2014-2015

Ticket Performance Events/Shows (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Full Day)

$290

Whole Building (Evening)

$195

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$100

Private Social Functions (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Full Day)

$195

Whole Building (Evening)

$160

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$85

Meeting-Non Commercial/Cultural and Community Events (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Full Day)

$147.50

Whole Building (Evening)

$100

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$52.50

Sport Activities & Practice (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Full Day)

$85

Whole Building (Evening)

$57.50

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$37.50

Hourly rate (Evening)

$16

Hourly rate (Morning/Afternoon)

$13

Shows - Commercial & Trade Shows (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Per Day)

$500

Business Seminars/Conferences (Includes GST)

Whole Building (Per Day)

$350

Whole Building (Evening)

$200

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$180

6.5 Trafalgar St Hall

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 66% General rate 34%User charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan, this allows management by contractor (Spotless) responsible for bookings, cleaning and maintenance

Hire

No changes to 2014 - 15 price

Whole Building (Full Day)

$420

No changes to fees are proposed

Whole Building (Evening)

$210

Whole Building (Morning/Afternoon)

$210

Private Social Functions (Includes GST)

Hall (Full Day)

$420

Hall (Evening)

$210

Hall (Morning/Afternoon)

$210

Hall (Full Day)

$300

Hall (Evening)

$150

Hall (Morning/Afternoon)

$150

Small Meeting Room (Full Day)

$120

Small Meeting Room (Evening)

$60

Small Meeting Room (Morning/Afternoon)

$ 60

Small Meeting Room per hour

$ 12

Sport Activities & Practice

Hall (Full Day)

$300

Hall (Evening)

$150

Hall (Morning/Afternoon)

$150

Hourly rate (Evening)

$25

Hourly rate (morning)

$18.75

Whole Building (Per Day)

$750

Hall (Per Day)

$500

Hall (Evening)

$300

Hall (Morning/Afternoon)

$300

6.6 Trafalgar Park Pavilion

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates 0-20% User charges

Current recovery: 93% General rates 7% User charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan which allows mmanagement by contractor (Spotless) responsible for bookings, cleaning and maintenance

It is proposed an increase of CPI (0.8%) is applied to closer align recoveries with Revenue and Financing Policy

Hire

2014 -15

2015 -16

Private Social Functions (Includes GST)

Pavilion (Full Day)

$650

$655

Pavilion (Evening)

$435

$438

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$380

$383

Meeting-Non Commercial/Cultural and Community Events (Includes GST)

Pavilion (Full Day)

$435

$438

Pavilion (Evening)

$330

$333

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$230

$232

Meeting room per hour

$30

Business Seminars/Conferences (Includes GST)

Pavilion (Full Day)

$750

$756

Pavilion (Evening)

$500

$504

Pavilion (Morning/Afternoon)

$500

$504

Section 7: Crematorium

Revenue and Financing Policy: 40-60% General rates 0-20% 40- 60 % User charges

Current funding recovery; 34% General rates, 66% User charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan, this allows for human and pet cremations

Hire

2014 -2015

(Inc GST)

No changes to fees are proposed

Adult cremation

$500

Adult after hours or Saturday

$600

Adult Sunday or public holiday with agreement from operator

$750

Oversize caskets

$650

Child cremation (1-12)

$400

Child cremation after hours or Saturday

$450

Child cremation Sundays or Bank holidays with agreement from operator

$500

Stillborn/New born (less than 1 yr)

Chapel Hire - Service

$ 250

Chapel hire - Committal

$50

Extra Large Dog

$200

Large Dog

$150

Medium Dog

$100

Small Dogs

$60

Toy Breed Dogs, and all Cats

$35

Section 8: Cemeteries

Revenue and Financing Policy: 40- 60% General rates 40- 60% User charges

Current recovery: 67% General rates 33%User charges

2014 -15 (Inc GST)

2015 -2016 (Inc GST)

Burial Plot Fees

It is proposed an increase of 3% is applied to closer align recoveries with Revenue and Financing Policy

Single plot, 2.4m x 1.2m

$1,650

$1,700

Single plot, 2.0m x 0.9m, set apart for interment of children

$ 900

$927

Natural Burial Plot: To be confirmed

$1,650.

$1,700

Out of district - additional fee on any plot

$1,150

$1,184

a) for burial of cremated remains in plot, 1.2m x 0.6m (up to 4)

$450

$463

c) for burial of cremated remains, Memorial Lawn - Marsden Valley Cemetery

$500

$515

e) Bellbird ashes lawn family plot (up to 8)

$900

$927

f) Out of district - additional fee on any ashes plot

$400

$412

g) Memorial Kerb Plaque only Small

Large

$190

$ 500

$195

$515

Burial Interment Fees

Burial plot, aged 12 years upwards - weekday

$720

$741

Burial plot child 1-12 years

$460

$473

Burial plot up to 1 year including stillborn

$ 200

$206

Burial Disinterment

$2,000

$2,060

Reinterment

$850

$875

Saturday additional fee on any plot

$175

$180

Public holiday - additional fee on any plot

$450

$463

Ash internment fees

Ash Internment

$155.

$160

Ash Disinterment

$155

$160

Saturday additional fee on any plot

$150

$155

Public holiday - additional fee on any plot

$200

$206

Other service charges	2014 – 2015 (Inc GST)	2015 -2016 (Inc GST)
Late funerals extending after 3.30pm	$200	$205
Transfer of interest: For transfer of interest in any purchase of exclusive right of burial in any plot.	$100	$103
Records: Genealogical Research - the first hour is free, thereafter a single charge per hour is due.	$ 50	$52
Approval of installation of plaque: Plaques are to meet the Council's specifications and bylaws.	$60	$62

Section 9: Nelson Public Libraries

Revenue and Financing Policy: 90-100% General Rates 0-10% User charges

Current funding recovery: Elma Turner: 95.4% General rates; 4.6% user charges

Stoke: 94.7% General rates; 5.3% user charges

Nightingale: 95.3% General rates; 4.7% user charges

Governed by Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan, this includes NCC management and maintenance of three libraries, Elma Turner, Stoke and Nightingale

Fees and charges have not been adjusted since 2003

Fees will be under review in 2015/16 No changes are proposed to the 2014-15 prices

Fees and charges	2015-2016 Prices
Extended loan charges (per day)	$0.30c
Reserve fee (per request)	$2
CD/DVD loan fee (per item)	$2
Photocopying / printing (per sheet)	$0.20c
Inter-library loan	$5 minimum
Replacement library card	$2.50
Out of region library membership	$120 household per yr $30 for 3 months
Debt administration fee (Debt Agency accounts)	$10
Nightingale meeting room hire (1/2 day)	$8
Elma Turner Activity room hire (1/2 day)	$20 charitable groups $40 commercial groups

Section 10: Founders Heritage Park

Founders park is not specifically covered in the Revenue and Financing Policy

Current recovery: 60%General rates 40%User charges

Note – Founders fees and charges last reviewed in April 2008. 2008 prices did not include cleaning.

The cleaning has been included so that Founders can maintain the facility at an acceptable level i.e. not cleaned by the hirer.

Proposed fees reflect inclusion of cleaning fees, except for meeting room bookings where impact on room is low and hirer can easily bring venue back to satisfactory standard.

Hire	2008 price review (approved by Founders Sub committee)	2014-2015 (Incl GST)	2015-2016 (Incl GST)	Comment
Meetings – 3hrs (self clean)				Increases for meeting room fees are equivalent to accumulating CPI of 4% over 6 years, plus a small increase for improved facilities.
Jaycee Room	$35	$35	$50	Regular monthly or weekly bookings receive a discount
Granary	$35	$35	$50	Improved toilets and kitchen facilities since last review
Energy Centre	N/A	$35	$50	New asphalted floor in place since last pricing review
Church	$85	$85	$150	Inline with other church hire fees around the community
Meetings – full day (self clean)				Increases for meeting room fees are equivalent to accumulating CPI, plus a small increase for improved facilities.
Jaycee Room	$80	$80	$100	Accumulating CPI
Granary	$100	$100	$200	Improved toilets and kitchen facilities since last review
Energy Centre	N/A	$100	$200	New asphalted floor in place since last pricing review
Function Hire – 24 hours				Previously an evening booking fee, that included a set up day, this increases is equivalent to accumulating CPI plus inclusion of fixed cleaning costs and a small increase for improved facilities.
Jaycee Room	$200		$400	Accumulating CPI and cleaning
Granary Off peak – Sun-Wed	N/A	N/A	$500	Off peak fees will be offered to encourage use during quiet seasons
Granary Peak – Thurs -Sat	$450		$800	Improved toilets and kitchen facilities since last review
Energy Centre Off peak – Sun-Wed	N/A	N/A	$1,200	Off peak fees will be offered to encourage use during quiet seasons
Energy Centre Peak – Thurs-Sat	N/A	$450 + cleaning	$1,500	New asphalted floor in place since last pricing review
Functions – additional set up/pack downs days if required				In the past set up days have been included in the evening booking price, we propose to now charge these at the day rate.
Granary	N/A	N/A	$200 per day
Energy Centre	N/A	N/A	$400 per day
Event – more than 5 days	N/A	N/A	$400 per day
Grounds Hire
Less than 100 people			$50	Suitable for photo shoots
More than 100 people	N/A		$300	Suitable for large family reunions
Conference				Conference hire fees include all park resources including projector, screens, chairs and tables.
All venues / all resources		$1,100 + cleaning	$2,500 plus GST	Includes set up, breakdown days and cleaning costs
Additional day	N/A	N/A	$1,500 plus GST	Second day low impact
Full Park Event hire All venue / all resources Includes set up / pack day if required –max 3 days				Flat fees are essential, moving away from a percentage of gate takings as this results in shared liability
No alcohol event	$800 plus $2-$5 or 20% of gate takings	$800 plus $2-$5 or 20% of gate takings	$2,500 plus GST	most events operating on the $800 plus percentage pay $2,500 fee if the event is successful
Alcohol / food carts event	N/A	N/A	$3,300 plus GST	Commercial events have larger impact on park
Off peak (shoulder season June to September), non alcohol event.	NA	N/A	$1,100 plus gst	Encourage community events during shoulder season.

Section 11: Broadgreen House

Revenue and Financing Policy: 80-100% General rates

Fees currently retained by Broadgreen Society – this is under review

No changes are proposed to the 2014-15 prices

Fees and charges Type	2015-2016 (Incl GST)
Adult entrance fee	$5.00
Senior Citizen entry fee	$4.00
Student entry fee	$1.00
Under 5 yrs entry fee	No charge

Community Services Committee

2 July 2015

REPORT R4195

Reserve Management Plan: Sports Ground Reserves

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To seek guidance from Council on priorities in developing Reserve Management Plans.

2. Delegations

2.1 The Community Services Committee has responsibility for the provision and operation of recreation and leisure facilities and services, including reserves, parks, and sports fields. It also has the power to recommend the development or review of policies and strategies relating to this area of responsibility.

3. Recommendation

THAT the report Reserve Management Plan: Sports Ground Reserves (R4195) be received.

Recommendation to Council

THAT a Reserve Management Plan for the Sports Ground Reserves is developed under The Reserves Act 1977 for the provision of areas for recreation and sporting activities, and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public.

4. Background

4.1 Reserve Management Plans (RMPs) are working documents which set out objectives and policies for managing reserves and have a number of objectives, including that they:

4.2 Satisfy statutory requirements under the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act) for those reserves covered by the Act

4.3 Set out policies for the current and future management of specific parks and reserves

4.4 Provide a set of policies that create consistency across a category of parks and reserves

4.5 Enable the community to have the opportunity to submit its views on the way parks and reserves are managed.

4.6 For some areas of land it is a legislated requirement under the Act to produce a RMP. This includes land where Council is appointed as administrator, when land is vested in Council as reserve, and where it had reserve status under previous Acts.

4.7 Over the years Council has acquired land in various ways and in some cases, land has been gazetted and classified as reserve land, while in other cases it has not been considered appropriate to do this.

4.8 Council has in the past developed and adopted plans for individual reserves as well as for groups of reserves. The following plans have been adopted, or in the case of the Brook Recreation Reserve, are being progressed:

Reserves	Adopted	Review Date
Tahunanui Reserve	April 2004	2017
Haven Holes Esplanade Reserve	May 2006	2020
Esplanade and Foreshore Reserves	July 2008	2018
Saxton Field Reserve	October 2008	2018
Conservation and Landscape Reserves	November 2009	2019
Rutherford and Trafalgar Parks	August 2010	2020
Brook Recreation Reserve	In progress

4.10 Reserve Management Plans are yet to be developed for: sports grounds, horticulture parks, neighbourhood parks, cemeteries, campgrounds, or historic reserves.

5. Discussion

5.1 The Reserves Act 1977 required development of management plans within five years of the commencement of the Act, so Council is well behind in its compliance. Past practice has been to complete RMPs as other priorities allowed.

5.2 The highest priority identified in the current draft Parks and Reserves Asset Management Plan 2015 is for the Horticulture RMP with the Sports Grounds Reserves to follow. However on closer review of the issues affecting the different types of reserves, officers now recommend the Sports Grounds RMP be tackled first.

5.3 This view is based on there being a greater proportion of sports ground reserves subject to the Act, as well as the number of issues impacting on the management of the sports grounds (see 5.5 below).

5.4 A brief description of the reserves and the types of matters to be addressed through a RMP, are provided in the following paragraphs.

Sports Grounds Reserves

5.5 Council manages several sport and recreation reserves catering for a number of different codes at varying levels. There is also a variety of structures and facilities associated with the reserves.

5.6 RMPs have been prepared for Saxton Field, and Rutherford and Trafalgar Parks. The Tahunanui Reserve Management Plan also includes the sports fields at Tahunanui which are considered as part of the integrated plan for the whole of the reserve area.

5.7 The sports grounds proposed to be considered as part of a RMP are: Botanics Sportsfield; Guppy Park; Neale Park; Waahi Takaaro Golf Course; Maitai Cricket Ground; Marsden Recreation Reserve; Ngawhatu Sports Ground; Victory Square; and Greenmeadows. All but one of these reserves is subject to the provisions of the Act.

5.8 A RMP for these Reserves would address a number of matters raised by the public, sporting bodies, and within Council including:

5.9 Effective management of the parks to meet user demand and need eg the trend away from organised sports towards more flexible and informal recreation (nationally and internationally) and addressing issues of accessibility.

5.10 Financial sustainability including options for cost sharing, partnerships, sponsorship, mixed commercial – recreational use. This includes ensuring that surfaces are delivered at a standard which is “fit for purpose” and in a way which is affordable.

5.11 Environmental sustainability including the management of cultural and natural heritage features.

Horticulture Parks

5.12 Council owns and manages a number of “horticulture parks” providing high amenity spaces contributing to urban beautification. Council has acquired these parks through a variety of means and not all the land is subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act. The issues that a RMP for horticulture parks would address include:

5.13 Appropriate recognition and management of the history of the reserves, including the significance of the land to iwi.

5.14 Management of the trees and woodlots on the properties including balancing the historic/landscape values of trees with practical maintenance matters.

5.15 Use of the properties, including the relationship between each park and their associated buildings and structures.

5.16 Licences, leases and other agreements i.e. how events and commercial activities on sites are managed or permitted.

Neighbourhood Parks

5.17 Council owns 98 neighbourhood parks providing accessible recreation areas close to home, and which enhance residential areas. The parks share a number of issues identified in other parks categories such as maintenance and operations costs.

Campgrounds

5.18 Council owns three major campgrounds (Tahunanui, Brook and Maitai) A draft RMP which includes the Brook Campground is in process, and a wider review of Council owned campgrounds has been initiated.

Cemeteries

5.19 The Council owns three operational cemeteries which share some issues in common, and some that are specific to the type of facility being offered. The types of matters which might be addressed by a RMP include the impact of a change in demographics, community preferences for different burial types, and grounds maintenance issues.

Historic Reserves

5.20 Council manages a number of reserves which could be classified as “historic reserves” including some historic cemeteries, maintained as parks. Matters addressed in a RMP would include maintenance of historic records and sites, interpretive information, and access.

Process for developing a Reserves Management Plan

5.21 The Reserves Act 1977, section 41, prescribes the procedure for the development of a RMP. Council must notify its intention to develop a Plan and invite written suggestions. Submissions are again called for over a two month period once the draft Plan is developed. Hearings are required before the Plan is adopted.

5.22 To achieve integrated management, it is proposed that the RMP is developed using this process regardless of the status of each individual reserve. The RMP will only have statutory force for those parcels of land that are gazetted whereas for other parcels, the RMP will have the status of Council policy and Council will not be bound by the terms of the Act for them.

6. Options

6.1 There are sound policy and management reasons for developing RMPs for the parks and reserves under the care of Council, as well as in some cases, legislated obligations under the Reserves Act 1977.

6.2 There is an option to not proceed with the development of a RMP at this time. This is not recommended as Council has legislated obligations to be met.

6.3 It would be an option to only prepare a RMP for those pieces of land subject to the Act. This option is not recommended as there is real benefit from taking an integrated approach, and grouping similar spaces together for the management purposes, regardless of their status.

6.4 Council has the option as to which of the described open spaces has a plan progressed. It is recommended that an RMP for Sports Grounds reserves be developed first due to the proportion of these reserves which are subject to the Act, as well as the issues which they present. It is recommended that this work is followed by an RMP for Horticulture Parks.

7. Alignment with relevant Council policy

7.1 The draft Parks and Reserves Asset Management Plan proposes dates for the preparation of RMPs which will be aligned with the decision made in response to this report. The development of a RMP fits with the goals of Nelson 2060, and with the Council’s Community Outcomes.

8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

8.1 This decision is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

9. Consultation

9.1 Consultation would take place during the development of a Reserve Management Plan.

10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

10.1 Iwi/Māori will be consulted early in the process of the development of a RMP regardless of which group of reserves is being considered.

11. Conclusion

11.1 It is recommended that an RMP for Sports Grounds is progressed at this time.

Susan Moore-Lavo

Policy Adviser

Attachments

Nil

Community Services Committee

2 July 2015

REPORT R4167

Stoke Community and Sports Facility

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve the concept plans for the proposed Stoke Community and Sports Facility (the Facility) to enable the project to proceed to detailed design, resource and building consents to achieve a commencement date on site of March 2016.

2. Delegations

2.1 The Community Services Committee has the delegation to approve projects relating to recreational and leisure facilities, services including reserves, parks, sports fields and swimming pool facilities as included in the Council’s Annual Plan/Long Term Plan.

3. Recommendation

THAT the report Stoke Community and Sports Facility (R4167) and its attachments A1362093, A1325549, A1360375, a1351796, a1360960 and a1372406 be received;

AND THAT it be noted that a review of the management of the facility is still to be undertaken and will be reported back to a future Community Services Committee;

AND THAT the Concept design (with no cafe) to construct the new Stoke Community and Sports Facility at the Greenmeadows site be approved to allow detailed design to commence and resource/building consents to be secured;

(noting the concept will be tabled at the meeting)

Recommendation to Council

THAT the Concept design with cafe (attachment A1362093) to construct the new Stoke Community and Sports Facility at the Greenmeadows site be approved to allow detailed design to commence and resource/building consents to be secured;

(noting the concept will be tabled at the meeting)

THAT the Concept design (with additional community space in place of the cafe) to construct the new Stoke Community and Sports Facility at the Greenmeadows site be approved to allow detailed design to commence and resource/building consents to be secured;

AND

THAT the budget to complete the Stoke Community and Sports Facility at Greenmeadows is increased to $5.96 million (over two financial years).

4. Background

4.1 The Community Services Committee resolved on 11 September 2014 as follows:-

AND THAT a multi-use sports and community centre be located in the proximity of the existing Greenmeadows changing facility;

AND THAT approval be given to secure the services of an external project manager to manage the project deliverables by way of public advertisement;

AND THAT the above recommendations be released from public excluded;

AND THAT construction costs for the Stoke community and sports facility be considered in the 2015-25 Long Term Plan.

4.2 A Council workshop held on 24 February 2015 confirmed a preference for the chosen building location.

4.3 The workshop also confirmed a preference that no financial contribution be accepted from the sports clubs on the basis of part ownership, and that ownership remains with the Council.

4.4 A number of issues were raised by Councillors at the workshop for the design team to consider in the concept design before reporting back to the Community Services Committee. The complete list is shown in Attachment 2.

5. Discussion

Major Stakeholder feedback

5.1 The design team consulted individually with the previously identified major stakeholder groups which included Stoke Seniors, U3A (University of the Third Age), Stoke Rugby Club, Stoke Tennis Club and Nelson Cricket. Feedback was also received from The Toy Library, Plunket and Stoke Junction. Feedback is summarised in Attachment 3.

5.2 Stakeholder feedback gave the expected number of users, spaces required, frequency of use and facilities required. This information formed the design brief for the Architects who turned this information into room sizes, room numbers and facilities.

5.3 The resulting building area was considerably larger than the 1200 m² envisaged and budgeted. The flexible nature of the proposed facility has enabled spaces to be rationalised whilst not affecting the function of the facility.

Resource Consent

5.4 It is considered highly probable that the resource consent process will be required to be notified for the following reasons:

a. The prominence and importance of the site to Stoke;

b. The presence of residential neighbours to the site along Songer Street;

c. Traffic management;

d. The scale of the proposed developed and the number of consents required;

It should be noted that should the consent be notified and subject to an appeal, subsequent timeframes for project completion would be affected.

Parking

5.5 48 car parks have been created on site in the concept development; this is an additional 20 to those currently on the site. Provision has been made for 16 cycle parks.

5.6 The NRMP may require up to 99 car parks, however it is expected that fewer will be needed.

Zoning

5.7 The chosen site is recreation reserve zoned Open Space Recreation and scheduled as SF3 (Sport fields, Greenmeadows Reserve).

Concurrent works

5.8 Alongside the work in this facility, other work-streams and studies are being undertaken concurrently. These include:

5.8.1 Stoke Urban Design Plan, due to be completed December 2015. Criteria include:

· Be inspiring, visionary and aspirational;

· Improve the ‘look, feel and function’ of the Stoke Centre;

· Ensure that social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeings are considered and woven into the assessment, planning, development and implementation stages of the study;

· Have a high level of ownership and engagement amongst the community, the Council, relevant Council business units, and amongst businesses and landowners;

· Build on the existing parts of the Stoke Centre that are working well;

· Ensure that the proposals take into account community needs, aspirations and capacity to implement;

· Ensure that any suggested actions are grounded in reality including financial, hazard response, feasibility and community acceptance.

The urban design plan will look at the Stoke Library as this needs to be larger and could potentially move to better serve current and future users, the future of the Stoke Memorial Hall will also be considered as well as the planning for the Youth Park.

5.8.2 Public art & heritage panels 2015/2016. To highlight Stoke heritage in central Stoke and to encourage public art.

5.8.3 Stoke CBD Transport study (2015/16) and enhancements (2016/17) which will form part of the Urban Design Plan.

5.8.4 Feasibility study for Putaitai right turn onto Main Road, Stoke. To find a way to reduce the speed of ‘rat-run’ vehicles through Strawbridge Square.

5.8.5 Strawbridge Square layout and concrete planter removal. To review the layout to find a way to improve the ease of use of the square.

5.8.6 Stoke Foothills transportation study to provide a robust implementation plan for arterial and collector traffic in the Stoke foothills area.

5.8.7 Youth Park for Stoke – funding of $539,000 has been allocated in 2017/18 and 2018/19 for further consultation, planning and physical works.

Cafe

5.9 One of the key deliverables from the Council workshop was to consider the inclusion or not of a Cafe in the facility.

5.10 The design team considered the economic return on investment and the effect on surrounding businesses. This was presented to the Commercial Sub-committee on 18 June 2015, who advised that data on lease valuation and the likely level of interest from real estate agents be considered, noting that without strong financials the Commercial Subcommittee would not recommend the inclusion of a standalone cafe as a commercial venture. This information will be available on the day.

5.11 Officers seek direction from this committee on whether to include the Cafe in the facility or not and to consider the Concept design options.

5.12 Council’s solicitors have confirmed that a lease can be granted for the Cafe. However, the Council will need to give public notice and consider any objections before deciding to grant such a lease under section 54(1) (d) of the Reserves Act.

5.13 A Business Case for the Cafe has been completed. Refer to Attachment 4.

5.14 Food and beverage retailers opposite the facility (on Main Rd Stoke) have provided feedback on the Cafe proposal and an Impact Assessment has been commissioned to find out what the effects would be on adjacent businesses if a Cafe was included in the facility.

5.15 The Impact Assessment is solely focused on this from a resource management perspective which does not allow for potential trade competition effects. Council needs to determine whether it seeks to set up a café which will potentially compete with other cafe business in stoke. Given there is work going on to look at Stoke centre broadly there is no desire to inadvertently affect existing business.

Building Category

5.16 The building is to be designed to importance level 3 (IL3). The cost to construct to IL4 (facility that could be used for Civil Defence) would add approximately 30% on to the structural costs. The Manager Emergency Management at Civil Defence advises that this is not required.

Commercial kitchen

5.17 A full commercial kitchen is included to service the needs of user groups wishing to cater for their members or the hiring out of facilities for functions.

Concept Plan

5.18 The facility is to be located in a prominent location with expected high usage and therefore good, lasting and appealing design is important.

5.19 The design team considered the feedback from the Councillors workshop and the stakeholders and developed the concept plans.

6. Potential Risks to a successful project

6.1 Objections from the Songer Street residents close to the facility against noise, disturbance and urbanisation.

6.2 Objections from Stoke residents and businesses generally despite the Spotlight on Stoke feedback particularly when the future of the Memorial Hall is undecided.

6.3 Major Stakeholders all expressed their wishes to use the facility extensively but are under no obligation to do so when it’s complete.

6.4 Stoke Tennis Club may object to the removal of the 2 public tennis courts although they will still have their original number of 5 courts. Recent consultation with the club indicates support for the proposal provided that the club will still have access to 5 courts.

6.5 HAIL assessments indicate very minor level of contaminants with no significant issues.

6.6 Initial geotechnical investigations show no significant issues.

7. Financial

7.1 Council recently as part of the May LTP deliberations approved the amount of $5.617 million over 2 financial years ($1,000,000 in 2015/16 and $4,617,450 in 2016/17) to progress with the facility.

7.2 Costs expected to the end of the 2014/15 financial year are $100,000 for concept designs (total budget for 2014/15 $200,000).

7.3 Preliminary estimates from the concept plans show that the projected cost to complete the works is more than the budget.

7.4 The estimate to build the facility including the Cafe and the general landscaping as shown on the concept plans is estimated at $5.96 million, or $5.63 million without the floorspace for the cafe.

7.5 There are a number of additional “nice-to-haves” totalling $787,000 that are not in the budget, including:

a) Acoustic folding doors to sub-divide the main hall into two ($132,000).

b) Specific landscaping enhancements around the facility/tennis area. Add $514,000. See Attachment 5 – A1360960.

c) Wooden sprung dance floor to main hall: ($91,000).

d) Environmental options, (Solar hot water and/or Photovoltaic panels): $50,000.

Council officers recommend these are not essential to a functional facility within budget.

7.6 The total estimate to complete the project (2015/16 and 2016/17) as per the concept plans including the Cafe is detailed below:

Item	Cost
Construction	$4,654,000
Cafe	$330,000
Consents	$160,000
Design fees	$566,000
Contingency @ 4.4%	$250,000
Total	$5,960,000
Less approved budget	$5,617,450
Budget shortfall	$342,550

Note: excludes additional “nice-to-haves” totalling $787,000 (see 7.5).

The cost for the concept design with additional community space in place of the cafe is estimated to be a similar cost to the estimates above.

8. Timeline

8.1 The programme to complete the facility is time critical.

8.2 Approval of this concept scheme is critical at this meeting to achieve the proposed commencement date on site in March 2016. Detailed design and consents have yet to commence

9. Management of the facility

9.1 Analysis on the management of the facility has yet to be completed but facilities for both a centre manager and office managers for the user groups have been included. On completion of this analysis a report with options will be presented to a future Community Services Committee.

10. Options

10.1 There are two options open to the Council with respect to the concept plans: to proceed with the concept plan or not to proceed with the concept plan.

10.2 Officers recommend that the concept plan as attached be approved so that detailed design can commence and resource / building consents can proceed.

10.3 The concept plans include most of the requests from the Councillors and stakeholders; it will be a good outcome for all parties.

10.4 The inclusion of a Cafe in the facility was introduced to the project at a Council workshop on the 24 February 2015, this was not been part of the original brief.

10.5 The building has been designed to cater for a Cafe facing onto Main Road Stoke and sharing the main pedestrian entrance to the Facility.

10.6 The design is such that should the Cafe not be required it can be removed from the end of the building, and minimal redesign would be required to accommodate this.

11. Alignment with relevant Council policy

11.1 The facility is included in the Draft 2015-18 Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan.

11.2 The facility was included in the 2014/15 Annual Plan and is included in the draft 2015-25 LTP.

12. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

12.1 This is not a significant decision in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement policy as there has been previous workshop engagement and the work has been budgeted for in the LTP.

13. Consultation

13.1 Extensive consultation with the Stoke businesses and major stakeholders has been undertaken.

14. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

14.1 No consultation has been undertaken with Māori.

15. Conclusion

15.1 The proposed Stoke Community and Sports Facility has the potential to be the start of the new ‘Heart of Stoke’ with space around it for further community facilities for civic, sports and general public use.

15.2 Extensive consultation has been undertaken with major stakeholders.

15.3 Council has signalled their intentions in the draft 2015-25 LTP to proceed with this facility.

15.4 The project is time critical and needs approval by this committee at this meeting to achieve the anticipated commencement on site of March 2016.

15.5 The design allows for flexibility with meeting rooms on the lower level being unaffected by the sports on the upper level and vice versa. Access between the two areas is easy and comfortable by either stairs or elevator.

15.6 Officers seek direction on whether to include a Cafe or not and therefore which concept design to progress with.

15.7 Officers recommend approval be given to proceed with one of the three presented concept plans in order that detailed design and securing of consents can commence.

Darryl Olverson

Major Projects Engineer

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1362093 - Stoke Community, Greenmeadows JTB final concept drawings - 2JULY2015

Attachment 2: A1377378 - Excerpts from a Council workshop on Greenmeadows Redevelopment 24 February 2015

Attachment 3: A1360375 - Stoke Greenmeadows, stakeholder feedback - 2JULY2015

Attachment 4: A1351796 - outline business case for greenmeadows cafe - 2JULY2015

Attachment 5: A1360960 - Stoke community and Sports Facility Greenmeadows, Nelmac Landscape Design - 2JULY2015

Attachment 6: A1372406 - Summary of local food and beverage business operator feedback on Cafe proposal

Outline Business Case for Greenmeadows Reserve Cafe

Prepared by: Darryl Olverson, Major Projects Engineer; Arlene Akhlaq, Senior Projects Adviser

SUMMARY

Options are being considered for provision of a café facility situated at the proposed Stoke Community and Sports Facility at Greenmeadows Reserve. During public consultation in 2014, positive feedback was received on an option for a café, and subsequently the Stoke Advisory Group requested that this option be investigated further. Concept design for the facility is in progress and currently includes a provision for a café space, situated at the main pedestrian access point

REASONS

Through the draft Long Term Plan 2015/25 Council states its intention that Stoke should have appropriate facilities and services to support its forecast growth. Construction of an improved community and sports facility at the Greenmeadows Reserve is a key part of this, with the intention of drawing more people to this part of the Stoke precinct and provide Stoke with a centre

BUSINESS OPTION 1 – do not provide café facility
Benefits	Avoid costs of the café build More potential for increased customers at local businesses (flow on from increased usage of the Community and Sports Facility at Greenmeadows Reserve) Free up space at the facility for future use – eg additional function room, re-site functional areas
Dis-benefits	Some redesign of entrance needed Loss of revenue from café lease
Costs	Cost of doing the project · Cost of redesign work Cost to operate and maintain the project’s products · None
Timescale	-
Risks	Local community and facility users may lobby for a café facility Customers may still not cross the road to existing Cafes

BUSINESS OPTION 2 – provide outside plaza space only for one or more beverage/food carts, seating areas, and movable seating to be used by cart operators

Benefits

Retains a large space at front of community and sports facility building for a plaza, which could be open to a variety of uses in the future (similar examples are the Morrison Square farmers market, or small community events similar to Victory Little Day Out)

Avoid costs of the café build

Potential for variety of different food/beverage providers – more choice

Provide more small business opportunities

Based on current budget plan, will realise savings

Dis-benefits

To an extent use of this area is weather dependant, limiting operating hours

Food carts operate with limited hours, and so do not provide a consistent presence

No foyer area inside the building to provide space for small informal gatherings

Costs

Cost of doing the project

· Low cost – some increase on the “do nothing” option but achievable within existing budget

Cost to operate and maintain the project’s products

· Costs involved in permit management and inspection

· Estimated annual revenue from food cart permits: $2000

Timescale

Overall facility construction:

Start on site March 2016, practical completion January 2017

Plaza available from February 2017

Risks

May not have ability to draw people to this area of Stoke

Unlikely to have permanent or consistent presence

May not be able to attract food cart operators due to lack of foot traffic

Aesthetic value of the facility may suffer

Potential to be untidy

BUSINESS OPTION 3 – provide outside plaza space for one or more beverage/food carts, seating areas, movable seating to be used by cart operators, and a foyer/entrance area (size to be determined) with internal seating

Benefits

Provide welcoming plaza and entrance foyer with both indoor and outdoor informal gathering spaces

Avoid costs of the full café build

Potential for variety of different food/beverage providers – more choice

Provide more small business opportunities

Based on current budget plan, will realise savings

Dis-benefits

To an extent use of this area is weather dependant, limiting operating hours; this is mitigated to some extent with the provision of indoor seating in the foyer

Food carts operate with limited hours, and so do not provide a consistent presence

Costs

Cost of doing the project

· Assume $2600 per m² for the foyer/entrance area

Cost to operate and maintain the project’s products

· Costs involved in permit management and inspection

· Estimated annual revenue from food cart permits: $2000

· Cleaning and maintenance costs included in the overall facility costs

Timescale

Overall facility construction:

Start on site March 2016, practical completion January 2017

Space available for food carts from February 2017

Risks

May not have ability to draw people to this area of Stoke

Unlikely to have permanent or consistent presence

May not be able to attract food cart operators due to lack of foot traffic

Aesthetic value may suffer; to an extent this can be managed through food cart permit conditions

Keeping the internal area clean and tidy could be hard; note that this will be the main pedestrian entrance to the Facility

BUSINESS OPTION 4 – a café facility with basic equipment leased to an operator. Include bench tops, cupboards, sinks, water, power, and light fittings for a café with a capacity for 40 covers inside, and 80+ covers outside. Café facility 88m² and kitchen area 39m²; outside terraces included as part of the overall facility build

Benefits

Revenue from lease of a café facility

Draw people to use the Community and Sports Facility; draw people to this part of the Stoke precinct and can impact positively on other local businesses

Enhances and provides a welcoming entrance to the facility

Indications are that large numbers of people will use the community and sports facility, and so a café is likely to be a viable business opportunity

A basic café facility provides flexibility for an operator to equip and furnish according to their specific type of beverage/food provision

Cafe leaseholders will have invested so will make best efforts to be successful

Dis-benefits

None to note

Costs

Cost of doing the project:

· Kitchen – $150,150 39m²

· Café area – $228,800 88m²

· Total build costs: $378,950

Cost to operate and maintain the project’s products

· Estimated annual revenue from lease: $23,000, plus an additional $60-$75 per m² for the outside area

· Lease set and monitoring costs

· Condition assessments

Timescale

Overall facility construction:

Start on site March 2016, practical completion January 2017

Café available for lease from February 2017

Risks

May not be able to attract an operator to lease

May be competing with local business who lose revenue

May draw complaints from existing business owners and nearby residents

BUSINESS OPTION 5 - a café facility with full equipment leased to an operator. Include: bench tops, cupboards, sinks, water, power, light fittings, cooking equipment, food storage and preparation equipment, and furniture for a café with a capacity for 40 covers inside, and 80+ covers outside. Café facility 88m² and kitchen area 39m²; outside terraces included as part of the overall facility build

Benefits

Revenue from lease of a café facility

Draw people to the community and sports facility; draw people to this part of stoke

Enhances and provides a welcoming entrance to the facility

Indications are that large numbers of people will use the community and sports facility, and so a café is likely to be a viable business opportunity

Dis-benefits

Limits ability to lease

Unknown costs of equipment maintenance (difficult to budget)

Costs

Cost of doing the project

· Kitchen – $189,150 39m²

· Café area – $228,800 88m²

· Total build costs: $417,950.00

Cost to operate and maintain the project’s products

· Estimated annual revenue from lease: $45,000, plus an additional $60-$75 per m² for the outside area

· Lease set and monitoring costs

· Condition assessments

· Equipment maintenance and repair (unknown)

Timescale

Overall facility construction:

Start on site March 2016, practical completion January 2017

Café available for lease from February 2017

Risks

More likelihood of tenants leaving at short notice

Damage to equipment

Equipment might not be suitable for tenants use

May not be able to attract an operator to lease

May be competing with local business who lose revenue

May draw complaints from existing business owners and nearby residents

Community Assistance Policy 2015

Contact: Shanine Hermsen, Manager Community Partnerships

Approved by: The Mayor and Councillors

Approval date: To be confirmed

Review date: June 2018

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Nelson City Council has been providing assistance to community organisations for many years through a variety of mechanisms such as funding agreements, one-off grants, rates remissions, intermediary loans, and community leases and licences.

1.2 This revised policy was approved by Council on (to be confirmed).

1.3 Further background information on the history of Community Assistance is outlined in the background paper provided for Council in November 2014 (A1256682).

2.0 VISION

2.1 Nelson is known as a centre of community innovation, together we tackle increasingly interconnected issues in thoroughly engaging ways that build resilience and a connected community.

3.0 OBJECTIVE

3.1 The purpose of this policy is to guide Council in relation to its support for charitable and non profit organisations, enabling groups to contribute towards Council’s Community Outcomes and the vision and goals for Nelson 2060.

4.0 TYPES OF COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE

4.1 Council provides community assistance as outlined in the table below. Council also provides rates remissions to community groups who own their own land. This is covered in a separate policy but the funding comes from the community assistance budget.

Type	Description
Community Investment Grants	Grants are provided for small scale projects or one-off items where the community identify a need for funding to achieve the strategic outcomes of the fund.
Community Investment Agreements	Agreements are developed based on community needs and contribution to achieving the strategic outcomes of the fund. There is no specified maximum amount for community investment agreements.
Intermediary loans	Loans obtained by Council on behalf of not-for profit organisations who wish to develop facilities on Council land but as they do not own the land cannot offer sufficient security to obtain loans on the open market.
Community leases and licences	Agreements with not-for-profit organisations that rent or occupy Council land and/or buildings.

5.0 ELIGIBILITY

5.1 Only organisations with “Registered charitable entity” status, or that can demonstrate that for tax purposes they are considered “not for profit”, will be eligible for Community Assistance under this policy.

5.2 Retrospective funding or loans will not be considered.

5.3 Only initiatives within Nelson and/or benefitting Nelson residents will be funded. Services delivered regionally will have funding eligibility relative to the benefit derived by Nelson residents.

5.4 Initiatives will need to contribute to Council’s Community Outcomes and the vision and goals of Nelson 2060.

6.0 COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FUNDING

6.1 Council recognises its role in Community Investment Funding is in setting the purpose, process and a financial contribution.

6.2 Officers will meet with representatives of other funding and social agencies (including Nelson Marlborough District Health Board, Canterbury Community Trust, Ministry of Social Development, Department of Internal Affairs and Tasman District Council and others experienced in the field of social development) to understand their strategic outcomes for community funding in Nelson which will provide context for the focus for which Council’s fund is to be applied.

6.3 Council officers will work with the community to identify partnerships that align with the strategic outcomes and focus of the fund and where Council financial support is deemed appropriate, officers will prioritise and recommend funding.

6.4 Final funding allocations will be made by the Community Investment Funding Panel which comprises two community representatives and the Group Manager Community Services or his/her nominated representative. This panel would also be involved with setting the strategic outcomes and priorities for the fund with the community.

6.5 Where financial support is provided, the contribution the project will make to the strategic outcomes and purposes of the fund must be demonstrated. Agreements must be for and clearly detail a specific service and/or outcome that will result from the funding.

6.6 Council officers and community representatives involved in funding decisions are required to note any possible conflicts of interest.

6.7 Where Community Investment Grants or Agreements are provided the following need to be considered:

· The level to which the wider community will be involved in the project.

· The past achievements or potential of the organisation and ability of the organisation to successfully administer the grant/agreement and deliver the outcomes.

· How the project achieves priorities that align with strategic outcomes and purpose of the fund.

· The contribution towards achieving the goals of other Council policies and strategies.

· Council’s intention to be a contributionary partner in support of initiatives which are sustainable, and avoid financial dependence on the Council for delivery.

· The value for ratepayer’s investment through the support of high quality initiatives that are effective and can produce clear benefits for communities.

· The ability of the project to realistically achieve intended outcomes.

· Council welcomes partnerships that seek to respond to issues and opportunities in innovative ways, and seek collaborative partnerships in their delivery.

· The level of match funding and/or in-kind support offered.

6.8 In addition to the considerations outlined in 6.7, Council may at times choose to focus grants on particular Council priorities. The decision on focus area can be made during the Annual Plan process or in response to unexpected community need which may arise from time to time.

7.0 INTERMEDIARY LOANS

7.1 The value of the intermediary loan pool is capped at $1.5 million. This figure excludes intermediary loans for regional facilities.

7.2 The additional criteria for intermediary loans are:

· Only developments on Council-owned land will be eligible.

· Intermediary loans will be for a maximum of one third of the value of the development.

· Council will not provide loan guarantees or interest-free loans.

7.3 Applications for intermediary loans will be considered for approval by the Community Services Committee or the Governance Committee.

8.0 COMMUNITY LEASES AND LICENCES

8.1 Community leases and licences adhere to the following:

· Formal lease agreements shall be required where organisations occupy Council land or buildings.

· Rent for the exclusive use of Council buildings or land will normally be set at 10% of the market rent for a comparable building or land.

· Rent for the non-exclusive use of Council buildings or land will normally be set at 5% of the market rent for a comparable building or land.

· Valuation of land for rental purposes shall be based on the Rateable Value.

8.2 Community leases for whole or part of Council owned buildings will be advertised when they are vacated so that all community groups have an opportunity to submit expressions of interest.

8.3 Buildings on Council land may be sold, conditional on the building being advertised and the prospective buyer obtaining a Council lease to occupy the land.

8.4 Termination of lease. See paragraph 10.2.

8.5 Applications for new community leases and licences will be considered for approval by the Community Services Committee or the Governance Committee using the criteria in paragraph 4 above.

9.0 ACCOUNTABILITY

9.1 All recipients of community assistance will provide periodic accountability reports documenting how their activities have contributed to the objectives for which the assistance was given. Reporting periods are as follows:

· Community Investment Grants – final report on project completion.

· Community Investment Agreements – annual reports using the Results Based Accountability model where possible. Interim reports may also be required when larger grants are allocated.

· Loans – annual reports

· Leases – annually for leases less than four years, minimum of four times during total lease period for leases over four years

9.2 Recipients that fail to submit accountability reports, or that have not spent the money in accordance with the application/contract, or where the use of the facility/land does not satisfactorily contribute to the community outcome will receive up to two written notices asking them to rectify the situation, and may thereafter be asked to return all or part of the funding or vacate the facility/land if they do not comply.

9.3 Community Investment Funding may continue or be terminated conditional on receipt of satisfactory reports. Recipients that fail to submit acceptable accountability reports may forfeit their eligibility to receive any Community Investment Funding in the future.

10.0 WHAT THIS POLICY DOES NOT COVER

· Council Controlled Organisations such as the Tasman Bays Heritage Trust, Bishop Suter Art Museum, Nelson Tasman Tourism and the Regional Economic Development Agency which are funded separately.

· Council funding for major community initiatives budgeted for separately through Council’s Long Term and Annual plan processes.

· The Youth Development Fund which provides financial support for young people to attend outdoor education courses.

· Council’s Events Marketing and Development Fund.

· Financial assistance to achieve resource management objectives such as fencing subsidies and subsidies to change heating methods. These costs are funded by Council’s Resource Management activities.

· Contracts or other commercial arrangements where a not-for-profit organisation is contracted to deliver a service for Council.

· Council support for regional facilities - that is capital projects costing $500,000 or greater.

· Council owned motor camps.

Community Services Committee

2 July 2015

REPORT R4287

Broadgreen House - change to levels of service

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider recommendations for changes to levels of service at Broadgreen House.

2. Delegations

2.1 Community Service Committee has delegated responsibility for heritage facilities with the power to recommend policies, strategies or any other matters related to those responsibilities.

3. Recommendation

THAT the report Broadgreen House - change to levels of service (R4287) and its attachments (A1368342 and A1374924) be received;

AND THAT Broadgreen House remains closed pending a Council decision on 23 July 2015.

Recommendation to Council

THAT Broadgreen House operate a closed winter season and an open summer season as outlined in Change Proposal (A1368342);

AND THAT Summer opening hours for Broadgreen House be confirmed as 10.30am to 4.00pm;

AND THAT revenue from house entrance fees now be retained by Council and be used to fund heritage promotions, exhibitions and other activities;

AND THAT staff negotiate a new Areas of Financial Responsibility agreement with Broadgreen Society to reflect Council decisions.

4. Background

4.1 Broadgreen House and the onsite collections are owned by Nelson City Council and are managed by Council staff. Broadgreen Society contributes to the operations of the House and owns the adjacent Broadgreen Centre building which is on leased council land.

4.2 Changes to staffing, governance and management practices across the Council’s heritage houses were noted in both the 2012-2022 and draft 2015-2025 Heritage Activity Management Plan (AMP).

4.3 The recent retirement of the Broadgreen Curator provides an opportunity to implement these proposed changes in a more cohesive way.

4.4 In late 2014 Council staff started work on making the relevant changes at Broadgreen House in line with the draft Heritage AMP. This work was flagged with the Broadgreen Society. In early April 2015 a draft Change Proposal was provided to the Society. After their initial feedback a revised proposal was sent to the Society.

4.5 Feedback from the Society has been included as an attachment.

5. Discussion

2015-2025 Heritage Activity Management Plan

5.1       The draft Heritage AMP identified a number of actions required to ensure that operations are cost effective and provide the best value for ratepayer contribution.

In particular:

5.73     Explore the alignment of governance and management practices across heritage assets to make better use of Council resources and money, and to achieve better community outcomes for the houses

5.74     Continue work identified in the previous Heritage Activity Management Plan to reallocate Council officer time across heritage assets to maximise expertise and knowledge

5.76     Continue the work of the Heritage Promotion Group to promote these heritage assets and take a collaborative approach to marketing and promotion where possible

5.79     As part of the business plan process, identify strategies to increase visitors to heritage assets

The recommendations in this report are in line with the above actions

5.2 The following table summarises income and expenditure across all Council heritage houses. Expenditure for Isel and Melrose Houses covers insurance, regular minor property maintenance and specific larger building projects. Broadgreen House expenditure includes insurance, security, electricity, phones, water, cleaning, property maintenance and staffing.

The following figures exclude interest and depreciation costs.

5.3 The following table summarises the cost to rates for Broadgreen House relative to the number of visitors.

	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15
Cost to rates	$168,134	$138,643	$115,322 prorata to April 2015
Visitor numbers	2,535 House only	2,103 House only	3,035 House only
Ratio of cost per visitor	$66.32	$65.92	$37.99

5.4 The most significant component of the Broadgreen House cost to rates derives from Council staffing. The draft Heritage AMP has recommended that staffing expertise and knowledge is maximised across all heritage assets which will also distribute the cost to ratepayers more evenly.

Broadgreen House Change Proposal

5.5 The following discussion points need to be read in conjunction with Attachment One as more detailed supporting information is provided in the Change Proposal.

5.6 The purpose of the Change Proposal is to ensure the continued viability of Broadgreen House by increasing the visibility and profile of the house and continuing to position the house as an important heritage facility.

5.7 Currently Broadgreen House is open every day except Good Friday and Christmas Day. It is proposed that opening times change to a model of an open summer season (October to June) and a closed winter season (June to October). Closure over winter does not preclude the opportunity to run winter events at the House or to continue to provide tours for large pre-booked groups.

5.8 In 2014 – 2015 House visits over winter (June-Sept) averaged 85 visitors per month compared to 429 per month over summer (November to April).

5.9 Closing over winter gives Council staff the capacity to undertake work across the other heritage facilities and to prepare a range of exhibitions and programmes to maximise usage during the summer months. The capacity to work across all facilities means that there will be greater synergies in heritage promotion, access to staff expertise, exhibitions and events.

5.10 Winter closing would also require solutions to be found to ensuring the desirable internal house environment is maintained and appropriate security is in place. There are a number of options available to address these issues and the most appropriate solution will be implemented if the recommendations are approved.

5.11 Broadgreen Society has expressed significant concern over the proposed winter closure. The Society has asked that the House remains open over winter and are prepared to provide guides in the absence of Council staff. They see the proposed closure as potentially eroding the House’s tourism profile and undermining their capacity to retain volunteers.

5.12 Responsibility for the house, visitors and volunteers using the House ultimately sits with Council. There are a number of risks to Council with Society volunteers guiding in the house on their own for long periods and without the support of a Council staff member. Risks include health and safety in case of falls and injuries, security with single staffing and questions over who has responsibility for Council’s building and fire regulations, and questions over who should provide cover if volunteers are unavailable.

5.13 Consideration should also be given to whether this is a viable long term solution to maintaining winter coverage.

5.14 Broadgreen House is currently open daily from 10.30am-4.30pm. To address concerns over reducing visitor demand and guides availability later in the day it is proposed that the House close at 4.00pm.

5.15 Annual revenue of approximately $10-$14,000 is derived from house entrance fees, sales and events, and is currently retained by the Society. The Change Proposal recommends that revenue from the house entry fees and souvenir sales ($8-$10,000) reverts to Council and contributes to the costs of heritage facilities promotions, delivering exhibitions and various summer events. Remaining revenue would remain with the Society to help fund some of their activities and expenses.

5.16 An agreement over areas of financial responsibility between Broadgreen Society and Nelson City Council was originally negotiated in 1995. As a result of this proposal this agreement would need to be renegotiated in line with approved recommendations.

5.17 The Change Proposal did include recommendations regarding the current vacant staff position and reporting structure. The intention with having Broadgreen House come under the management of Founders Heritage Park is to build on the synergies between these heritage facilities. It should be noted that the proposal’s staffing recommendation for a Heritage Registrar to work not only at Broadgreen House but across all heritage facilities is in line with achieving 5.74 of the draft Heritage AMP.

5.74 Continue work identified in the previous Heritage Activity Management Plan to reallocate Council officer time across heritage assets to maximise expertise and knowledge

5.18 Council has received some feedback from the community on the changes proposed. This has been prompted by the Broadgreen Society. Officers believe that the concerns raised in the feedback have been addressed in the change proposal.

5.19 Broadgreen House has been closed since late April 2015 for cellar repair work. It is anticipated that the House would be available for public access from the week commencing 6 July 2015. Given a final Council decision would not be made until 23 July 2015 it is recommended that the House remained close until that time.

6. Options

6.1 Status quo is maintained with a staff member recruited to fill the same role as previous. This would not be in line with actions required from the draft Heritage AMP.

6.2 Opening hours remain as current but other recommendations from the change proposal are accepted. This would achieve a number of the actions from the draft Heritage AMP but would not allow the expertise and knowledge to be maximised across all heritage assets or distribute the cost to ratepayers more evenly.

6.3 Opening hours remain as current but with Broadgreen Society volunteers taking responsibility for opening the House and providing guiding services during the winter months. This would allow visitors to continue to enjoy the House over winter but there are a risks associated with this option as outlined in 5.12 and 5.13.

6.4 Accept the recommendations as outlined in Change Proposal and in this report. This is the preferred option.

7. Alignment with relevant Council policy

7.1 The recommendations in this report are consistent with the actions required in the 2015-2025 Draft Heritage Activity Management Plan.

7.2 The changes to levels of service will require funding to be allocated for promotions, running exhibitions and events but this would be covered with the entrance fees reverting back to Council.

8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

8.1 This matter is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2014.

9. Consultation

9.1 Consultation was undertaken with the Broadgreen Society as the main impacted party. Their feedback has been included as an attachment.

9.2 No wider public consultation was undertaken.

10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

10.1 Maori have not been consulted in regards to this report

11. Conclusion

11.1 A change to levels of service for Broadgreen House has been proposed. The purpose of the proposal is to ensure the continued viability of Broadgreen House and address action points from the draft Heritage AMP.

11.2 Opening times would change to a model of an open summer season and a closed winter season. Closing over winter gives staff the capacity to undertake work across the other heritage facilities and would also distribute the cost to ratepayers more evenly across the heritage assets.

11.3 Revenue from house entrance fees would revert back Council to assist with funding heritage facilities promotion, exhibitions and events.

Ian Littleworth

Manager Libraries

Attachments

Attachment 1: Broadgreen House - Change Proposal (A1368342)

Attachment 2: Broadgreen Society - Response to Change Proposal (A1374924)

Broadgreen House - Change Proposal

INTRODUCTION

This proposal charts a future direction for Broadgreen House that will ensure the ongoing viability of the house as a key heritage facility.

Key Drivers

· Ensuring the ongoing viability of Broadgreen House:

Increasing the visibility and profile of Broadgreen House as a visitor destination

Position Broadgreen House as an important heritage facility that will continue to make a significant contribution to telling Nelson’s historical story

Manage and promote the collection as an important element in telling this story

· Ensure that Broadgreen House operations are cost effective and provide the best possible value for ratepayer contribution

Ensure the operations of Broadgreen House are cost effective

Utilise staffing resources to greater benefit across all Nelson City Council heritage facilities

· Opportunity to review the relevant areas of governance, financial and operational responsibility of Broadgreen Society (Society) and Nelson City Council (Council).

Heritage Activity Management Plan (AMP)

The 2015-2025 draft Heritage AMP flags a number of issues that need to be resolved. These have been considered as part of this proposal

· More evenly distributing the cost to rates for heritage facilities across all heritage houses. Costs are predominantly driven by staffing and where staff resources are allocated (currently mainly to Broadgreen House)

· Level of staff support and expertise for exhibitions and collections provided to Isel and Melrose Houses

· Reliance on Friends groups or societies to manage the heritage house owned by Council going forward

· Low number of visitors

· Review is needed of the Broadgreen collection

PROPOSAL

OPENING TIMES

Broadgreen House is currently open from 10.30am – 4.30pm every day except Good Friday and Christmas Day.

An analysis of visitor numbers in 2014 shows:

November to April was busy with an average of 450 visitors per month. The two peak months were January and December which averaged 606 visitors per month.

May, September and October could be seen as shoulder months with variable numbers. In 2014 these 3 months averaged 143 visitors per month.

June-August are very quiet months with an average of 67 visitors per month. August was especially quiet with only 56 visitors.

Visitor figures for previous years follow similar trends.

Opening Times Proposal

Break the year into 2 seasons:

Summer Season (open) – from early October to Queen’s Birthday weekend (June)

October opening would be in line with the traditional opening launch of Isel House (Isel in Bloom) which provides an opportunity for joint marketing of these heritage houses.

Closure at Queen’s Birthday marks the end of busier months for Broadgreen House and is in line with Isel House closing for winter.

The summer season would have a focus on running programmes, exhibitions and promotions to maximise visibility and visits to Broadgreen House.

Opening the House would still be reliant on volunteers to staff the reception area and act as house guides. These volunteers would continue to be managed by Broadgreen Society.

Winter Season (closed) – Closed June to October

This is the time to prepare for summer season.

Prepare a range of exhibitions/programmes to be delivered in summer.

Greater focus on collection work across all heritage facilities.

Update any information resources and prepare marketing/promotional material.

Broadgreen House could still be opened up for specific tours or groups as required which would be organised through Broadgreen Society.

With this proposed closure of the House consideration needs to be given to ensuring the maintenance of an optimal climate/environment in the House to preserve the House and collections. Also external security would need to be reviewed given that staff and volunteers would not be present.

OPENING HOURS

Current hours are 10.30am-4.30pm.

Isel House is open from 11-4pm. This is an opportunity to bring some synergy of opening hours between the houses.

Opening Hours Proposal

10.30am – 4pm

10.30am is still felt to be the right time to open the House. An earlier start of 10.00am for this type of facility is too early both for visitors and the guides themselves. Whilst an 11.00am start is seen as too late in the morning.

Opening past 4.00pm raises the same questions around limited visitor demand and guides availability.

Daylight savings and summer weather would also provide a number of opportunities to offer temporary evening opening, perhaps as part of a holiday promotion or for events.

Tour visits could also be arranged outside of the regular opening hours depending on staff and volunteer availability.

STAFFING

Currently the position of Broadgreen Curator is vacant. This provides an opportunity to review this role and the delivery of services from Broadgreen House in light of the key drivers and the future requirements and needs raised in AMP

Through this position and Founders Heritage Park staff Council will have full responsibility for collections, exhibitions and promotions. This would continue to be supported by Broadgreen Society.

Staffing Proposal

That the role of a Heritage Facilities Registrar be created.

The position would be for approx 26+ hrs per week and would report to the Founders Heritage Park Team Leader. The position would work closely with the Founders Heritage Park Curator.

The position will have differing role focuses during the winter and summer seasons but the overall key responsibilities are to ongoing heritage collection work across all facilities, creating and delivering a suite of exhibitions and events to promote Broadgreen House and other heritage facilities, and a range of administration duties.

Winter season (closed)

· Focus on collections management across Broadgreen, Isel and Founders

o Accessioning, processing loans etc

o Database management

o Preparing objects for exhibitions

· Contributing to the preparation of a range of programmes, promotions and exhibitions to be delivered during the summer season

· Deal with information enquires as required

· Administration

o Emails

o Building maintenance / security / health and safety in collaboration with Library/Council staff

This position would not be based at Broadgreen House during this time although regular visits would be made.

Summer Season (open)

Whilst the focus in summer is on Broadgreen House the role during this time will need to be flexible as there will still be requirements to work at other locations on some days.

· Assist with the delivery of exhibitions/programmes as planned during winter season

· Continued heritage collection work with focus on Broadgreen House

· Implementing promotions including working with tour groups in collaboration with Broadgreen Society and supporting the guides if required

· Support the Society’s guides by acting as a backup guide if required

· Assist with preparing information resources/leaflets as required

· Handle information queries

· Administration

o Regular banking for Council

o Collating visitor statistics

o Deliver training as required – e.g. health and safety/ guides induction

o Building maintenance / security / health and safety in collaboration with Library/Council staff

To be clear this position would NOT be:

· Managing the volunteer guides or their rosters

· Acting as front of house/ reception when guides are already on duty

· The default backup person for guides if volunteers are unavailable

· Undertaking administration duties on behalf of the Society

o No longer preparing written monthly reports to the Broadgreen Society. A Council staff member would be happy to attend Society meetings and deliver regular updates and answer questions.

o As it is proposed (see below) that Broadgreen House’s revenue reverts back to Council there is consequently no need for a monthly financial summary to go to the Society Treasurer.

o Managing Society’s petty cash

PROMOTION

A key element of ensuring the ongoing viability of Broadgreen House is in the promotion / programme development of this facility and its collections.

The textile collection is a unique asset of the House and provides an opportunity to establish a point of difference in promoting Broadgreen.

The facility’s offerings need to be well marketed and promoted including the development of a greater web presence. Any programme development and promotion needs to be undertaken in collaboration with other heritage facilities.

Promotion Proposal

That the promotion/marketing/web presence of the House would sit with the Founders Heritage Park Team Leader and will be incorporated into a package of heritage promotions and programmes across all Council heritage assets.

That an annual marketing plan be developed.

Assistance will be given by Curator, the new Registrar and the Society as they feel able.

Founders Heritage Park Team Leader would attend the Heritage Promotions Group meetings on behalf of Council heritage facilities.

The Society would continue to support and manage a summer student programme to help with promotional activities and to allow the volunteers to have a summer break.

BROADGREEN REVENUE

Revenue is currently derived mainly from a House entrance fee, the selling of souvenirs and other promotional materials, hiring of Broadgreen Centre and takings from events like Rose Day.

In July 1994 all takings derived from Broadgreen House passed from the Council to the Society. This was a historical arrangement to address the difficult financial situation the Society found itself in at the time. Currently the financial position of the Society is far more secure.

It is appropriate that this arrangement be re-evaluated in light of the financial and operational responsibilities increasingly shifting back to Council.

Souvenirs are currently purchased and managed by the Society who retain any sales revenue.

Under the Broadgreen Centre lease agreement the Council is responsible for the rubbish, electricity, telephone, water, rates and external maintenance costs for the Centre.

Revenue received in relation to Broadgreen Centre belongs to the Society and it is appropriate that remains with them.

Revenue Proposal

If Council is to take on a greater role in future direction, promotion, administration and operations of Broadgreen House then it is proposed that any House revenue from house entry fees (approx $8-12K) contributes to the Broadgreen operational budget residing within Council. This ensures that the revenue from the House is being utilised for the ongoing benefit of Broadgreen. Council staff would need to manage the banking for Council and this would reduce the level of financial reporting made to the Society.

It is proposed that Council purchase the current souvenir stock from the Society and take over responsibility for managing sales and retain all revenue.

Funds raised by the use of Broadgreen Centre and from Rose Day activities (approx $2,000 from raffles, afternoon teas, BBQ, stallholders fees etc) would remain with the Society. The banking of these funds would be the responsibility of the Society.

Current lease arrangements regarding Broadgreen Centre would continue until the end of lease term.

BROADGREEN SOCIETY

The recommendations made above mean that changes would need to be made to the Areas of Responsibility as outlined in the Broadgreen Society Inc Handbook.

Some discussion has already occurred and some of the points that were raised have been considered as part of preparing this proposal.

Broadgreen Society Proposal

To facilitate further discussion I have firstly summarised what I see as the implications of this proposal for the Society.

The Society would:

· Continue house guiding including providing ongoing weekend cover

· Manage House guides - rostering, filling gaps etc

· Continue as current the greeting of visitors, receiving entry fees, recording visitor statistics and other front of house duties

· Coordinate and deliver training in conjunction with Council staff as agreed

· Manage Broadgreen Centre and related bookings, finances and maintenance

· Organise the Society’s AGM and Carol’s in the Park event with the support of Council staff if available.

· Contribute to the organisation of Rose Day in conjunction with the Council funded event organiser. (Rose Day is a council funded event and as such ongoing funding is at the discretion of Council)

· Support and manage temporary summer staffing to help with giving guides a break and to assist with the summer programme of events/exhibitions etc

· Help with House exhibitions and promotions as required

· Support the marketing of the House

In order to facilitate a discussion on revising specific points in the Areas of Financial Responsibility including operational responsibilities for the Society and Council the following changes are proposed:

· Council takes responsibility for Broadgreen House banking whilst Society retains revenue and responsibility for the banking of Broadgreen Centre and other long standing events (Rose Day).

· Responsibility for additional/one-off events or exhibitions would be determined as part of preparing those events.

· Council staff will no longer prepare a written staff or financial report to the monthly Society committee meeting. Any reporting can be delivered verbally should staff be invited.

· Council staff will no longer prepare a monthly statistical summary. This would be replaced by a six monthly summary or on request.

· Society manages any petty cash related to the Society’s activities

· Society continues to contribute funding towards the Broadgreen House collection, promotions and educational programmes although ownership and responsibility sits with Council staff.

· The level of that financial contribution would be agreed at the beginning of each financial year. The Society would also consider other special requests throughout the year if opportunities arise.

· That a revised list of responsibilities for each party be prepared

COUNCIL REPRESENTATION

Whilst not a specific part of this proposal there are potential implications regarding Councillor representation on the Society Committee.

It is recommended that discussion is undertaken as to the role of a City Councillor, appointed by Nelson City Council, as a member of the Society Committee in light of this proposal. This will also inform wider discussions that are currently being had at a Council level.

Minutes of a meeting of the Nelson Youth Council

Held in Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Friday, 15 May 2015, commencing at 1.02pm

Present: Helena George, Daniel Leaper, Zoe Palmer, Rhys Griffith, Lucy Field, Emily Thomas, Bronte Shaw (Chairperson), Elaine Ang, Katie Shaw, Taylah Shuker, Evy Ngawhika-Elliott, Fynn Jankiewicz-McClintock, Jamie Morgan, Jordan Lankshear, Keegan Phipps, Fynn Sawyer and Abbey Paterson

In Attendance: Social Wellbeing Adviser (R Large), Cadet – Community Services (J Clementson) and Administration Adviser (G Brown)

Apologies: Hannah Malpas, Sam McIlroy for attendance and Ryan McManus and Councillor Rainey for lateness.

1. Apologies

The apologies were noted.

The Chairperson welcomed Fynn Sawyer, a new councillor to Youth Council and thanked Rachel Burton for her contribution. She added that there were two new items to be included in the agenda, the library survey and Tahunanui postcards.

2. Confirmation of Minutes

2.1 23 April 2015

Document number M1004, agenda pages 4 - 8 refer.

It was noted that Helen should be Helena and the date in the minutes should be Thursday 23 April 2015.

Resolved YC/2015/001

THAT the amended minutes of the meeting of the Nelson Youth Council, held on 23 April 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Thomas / Leaper Carried

3. Sugary Drinks

Dr Rob Beaglehole, Principal Dental Officer, Community Oral Health Service, spoke about the impact of sugary drinks.

Dr Beaglehole spoke to a Powerpoint presentation (A1358123). Dr Beaglehole said sugary drinks were the number one source of sugar for teenagers. He advised that he had taken teeth out from children as young as eighteen months.

Attendance: Councillor Rainey joined the meeting at 1.06pm.

Dr Beaglehole advised that one can of Coca Cola had ten teaspoons of sugar. He advised that sugary drinks were the new tobacco and that New Zealand was the third highest in the World in relation to people diagnosed with diabetes.

Dr Beaglehole said that Council became role models by adopting a Sugar Sweetened Beverages Policy.

Attendance: Councillor Lawrey joined the meeting at 1.15pm.

He invited the youth councillors to a documentary called ‘That Sugar Film’ which was showing on Wednesday 27 May.

He asked youth councillors to advocate at their schools and speak with student leaders to initiate policies.

In response to a question, Dr Beaglehole said there was no nutritional value in sugary drinks, and that there was no evidence that people who drank sugary drinks then moved onto diet drinks.

In response to a further question, Dr Beaglehole said that he was actively seeking taxation of sugary drinks. He added that he wanted to raise awareness and reduce accessibility to these drinks.

There was a discussion about sports and the relationship with drinking alcohol.

In response to a question, Mr Beaglehole said fructose in fruit breaks down a lot slower that sugar, and that people should eat fruit rather than drink fruit juice.

4. Youth Week Competition

Rosey Duncan, Health Promoter – Community Action on Youth and Drugs, Health Action Trust, spoke about the Youth Week competition run by the Health Action Trust.

Ms Duncan advised youth councillors the competition was about alcohol and drug awareness and she asked if youth councillors could promote the competition. She said that the competition was a video and was aimed at 15-25 year olds. It was to be held in the final week of May and a primary health organisation person would be at each school for health week.

A contact person at each school was sought.

5. Youth Employment Opportunities

Keegan Phipps spoke about employment opportunities for youth in Nelson.

He said that students who leave school have people liaise with them through Government agencies such as Youth Service and Gateway. There were also programmes to help students who wanted to obtain an apprenticeship.

It was discussed that students could also speak with career advisers who would help them with their CV. It was advised that school leavers could be monitored until they reached 19.

Attendance: Youth Councillor Ryan McManus joined the meeting at 1.30pm.

Other schools discussed programmes which were available to students wanting to leave school. It was discussed that the programmes were marketed well and there was classes such as Resource, Social Studies as well as the Connections Service.

It was discussed that employment in Nelson was difficult as there were lots of over qualified people. It was mentioned that at times it was who you knew in Nelson.

Attendance: Youth Councillor Abbey Paterson joined the meeting at 1.47pm.

Abbey Paterson asked youth councillors if they could continue to think of ideas in relation to youth employment opportunities and if a CV writing session at the library would be worthwhile. Youth councillors advised that it would be beneficial. Elaine Ang, Fynn Sawyer, Abbey Paterson, Keegan Phipps, Ryan McManus, Jordan Lankshear, Rhys Griffith, Zoe Palmer, Bronte Shaw and Taylah Shuker expressed interest to be part of a sub group to discuss this matter further.

6. Rockquest Award

Jamie Morgan spoke about current actions for the Youth Council Rockquest Award for 2015.

Mr Morgan advised of the names of those attending and confirmed that youth councillors needed to buy their own tickets, which could be bought at the door for $10.

Councillor Rainey informed youth councillors that there were thirty eight acts for Rockquest, and looked forward to seeing the youth councillors there.

7. Youth Week Event

Bronte Shaw provided an update on progress for this event.

Ms Shaw advised youth councillors that everyone had been doing a great job. She said the subcommittee would meet after the Youth Council meeting.

Ms Shaw said that she would be away for the week leading up to the quiz.

8. Council Meet and Greet

Zoe Palmer, Ryan McManus, Lucy Field, and Helena George confirmed they would not be attending the Council Meet and Greet.

9. Urban Environment Bylaw

Daniel Leaper updated the Youth Council on the Urban Environments Bylaw decisions in relation to the Youth Council submission.

Mr Leaper advised that the changes would not take effect until 2 June 2015. He highlighted the changes to the bylaw and thanked youth councillors for their help with the submission.

Rachael Large advised the youth councillors that she had copies of the alcohol ban area before the changes for their information.

10. Youth Council Submission to the Long Term Plan 2015-2025

Keegan Phipps provided feedback on the experience of speaking at the Council hearing on 7 May 2015.

Mr Phipps thanked everyone who spoke.

Rachael Large advised the youth councillors that they had done a stunning job providing their feedback and conducting 1,000 surveys in one week.

11. Tahunanui Postcards

Arts and Heritage Adviser, Debbie Daniell-Smith discussed with Youth Council the Tahuna postcard and showed Youth Councillors some images to stimulate discussion (A1355656).

Ms Daniell-Smith said there was an opportunity to do another postcard, but it was up to the Youth Councillors to clarify content, based around discussion at an earlier meeting to work a Tahuna beach theme.

There was various suggestions including a native bush scene, planting scene, Nelson landmarks, iconic people and ideas on activities down at the beach such as kitesurfing and stand up paddleboarding. Daniel Leaper, Taylah Shuker, Jordan Lankshear, Zoe Palmer, Emily Thomas, Lucy Field, Fynn Jankiewicz-McClintock and Katie Shaw agreed to be part of a sub group to provide advice and sign off the final copy.

There was a discussion around Youth Council contributing $600 to the Tahunanui Postcard.

Resolved YC/2015/002

THAT the Youth Council contribute $600 to the Tahunanui Postcard.

Lankshear / Morgan Carried

12. Library Survey

Elaine Ang spoke about the library survey (A1354953).

There was a discussion around Youth Councillors being selective about which students were given the survey to complete, as it wouldn’t be relevant for some students. It was decided that representatives at each school should speak with the appropriate dean and decide whether to be selective or not, as lots of people struggled with study, and it may be relevant to wider groups at some schools.

In response to a question, it was confirmed the area allocated for a study area for NCEA would be the library activities room.

Attendance: Councillor Rainey left the meeting at 2.40pm.

13. Council Meetings

13.1 Council meeting – 30 April 2015

Document to be tabled at the meeting

Keegan Phipps and Ryan McManus provided feedback from the Council meeting on 30 April 2015.

Mr Phipps advised that he learned a lot about how to Chair meetings from observing the Her Worship the Mayor.

Councillor Lawrey clarified that the committee recommendation to Council was to move the sandwich boards to the kerbside. However, Her Worship the Mayor advised the minutes of the meeting did not represent what the community had asked for, therefore the Planning and Regulatory Committee was going to consider it again.

13.2 Works and Infrastructure Committee meeting – 5 May 2015

Evy Ngawhika-Elliott and Jordan Lankshear provided feedback from the Works and Infrastructure Committee meeting on 5 May 2015.

Jordan Lankshear read from a document (A1355968).

13.3 Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting – 14 May 2015

Taylah Shuker provided feedback from the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting on 14 May 2015

Ms Shuker advised that she enjoyed attending this meeting and found the minute process interesting. She highlighted the topics which were considered including Nelson 2060.

Rachael Large asked the youth councillors if they were aware of the Nelson 2060 document. The majority of the youth councillors had not, however a few were aware of it. Ms Large asked if it would be worthwhile if a staff member came to a Youth Council meeting to provide an overview. There was agreement for this.

14. General Business

Rachael Large highlighted the following business:

· The Youth Council agreed to Andrew from the Nelson Environment Centre attending their next meeting to discuss sustainability

· Training topics for the Top of the South forum. There was strong interest in communication skills, followed by presentation skills. It was clarified eleven people could attend, and that it would be a full day on Friday 17 July

Attendance: Councillor Lawrey left the meeting at 2.52pm.

· Youth ambassador opportunities, Blessing of the Fleet on Saturday 18 July; Fynn Sawyer, Taylah Shuker, Daniel Leaper, Fynn Jankiewicz-McClintock, Jordan Lankshear, Zoe Palmer, Emily Thomas, Helena George, Katie Shaw and Rhys Griffith expressed an interest to be considered for this

· One Saturday each month, Councillors meet at the market, youth councillors could join them if interested

· Youth Council agreed that they would like Her Worship the Mayor to attend a Youth Council meeting to speak with them

· Advised youth councillors if they wanted a Cricket World Cup flag they could have one

· Asked youth councillors to consider how they wished to support young people in Nelson and how money received could be used in the Community

· Advised youth councillors that she would email everyone with the subcommittee group members

The Chair clarified:

· Who was interested in being a point of contact for the Youth Week competition. It was agreed Emily Thomas, Ryan McManus, Fynn Jankiewicz-McClintock, Daniel Leaper, Katie Shaw and Jamie Morgan agreed to represent their school.

There being no further business the meeting ended at 3.09pm.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Funding type	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19
Existing agreements	$150,930	$93,690	$43,510	$0
Community investment grants	$50,000	$50,000	$50,000	$50,000
Community investment agreements	$99,070	$156,310	$206,490	$250,000
Total	$300,000	$300,000	$300,000	$300,000

	Current	Proposed
Opening Times	Daily except Good Friday and Christmas Day	Summer open season – Early Oct – Queens Birthday Weekend Winter closed season – Early June – early October
Opening hours	Daily 10.30am – 4.30pm	10.30am – 4.00pm
Staffing	Senior Curator	Heritage Facilities Registrar reporting to Founders Heritage Park Team Leader
Promotion / Web presence	Curator and Society	Lead by Founders Heritage Park Team Leader supported by Society
Broadgreen House revenue	Retained by Society	Entrance fees retained by Council who would now manage the banking Management of souvenirs and retention of sales revenue would shift to Council.
Broadgreen Centre /Rose Day etc revenue	Retained by Society	Retained by Society
Society		Continue to provide house guides
		Manage guides rosters, filling gaps, training etc
		Manage Broadgreen Centre bookings, events and finances
		Continue programme of summer staffing
		Continue to support House exhibitions, promotions and marketing through an agreed annual contribution
Areas of financial and operational responsibility	As per Broadgreen Society Handbook	Review responsibilities
Councillor representation	Councillor Noonan	Potential implications of proposal need further discussion